StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Platform as a Service
  4. Web Servers
  5. Apache Tomcat vs Uvicorn

Apache Tomcat vs Uvicorn

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat
Stacks16.9K
Followers12.6K
Votes201
GitHub Stars8.0K
Forks5.3K
Uvicorn
Uvicorn
Stacks168
Followers119
Votes0

Apache Tomcat vs Uvicorn: What are the differences?

  1. 1. Language: Apache Tomcat is written in Java programming language while Uvicorn is written in Python programming language. This difference in programming language affects the tools, libraries, and ecosystem that are available for each server.
  2. 2. Server Type: Apache Tomcat is a Java-based web server and servlet container, whereas Uvicorn is an ASGI server that is specifically designed for running Python web applications.
  3. 3. Performance: Apache Tomcat is known for its scalability, stability, and high-performance capabilities, making it suitable for enterprise-level applications with heavy traffic. On the other hand, Uvicorn is designed to be lightweight and fast, making it more suitable for small to medium-sized applications with moderate traffic.
  4. 4. Deployment: Apache Tomcat requires the deployment of applications as pre-compiled WAR files, which adds an additional step to the deployment process. Uvicorn, on the other hand, supports various deployment methods, including the use of Docker containers and virtual environments, simplifying the deployment process.
  5. 5. Ecosystem: Apache Tomcat has a rich ecosystem with a wide range of libraries, frameworks, and tools built specifically for Java web development. Uvicorn, being a Python-based server, benefits from the extensive Python ecosystem, including libraries like Django and Flask, making it easier to develop web applications using these frameworks.
  6. 6. Configurability: Apache Tomcat provides a wide range of configuration options and supports various protocols and connectors, allowing for flexible customization of the server settings. Uvicorn, on the other hand, focuses on simplicity and ease of use, providing a minimalistic configuration approach that is suitable for most Python web applications.

In Summary, Apache Tomcat and Uvicorn differ in the programming language, server type, performance, deployment process, ecosystem, and configurability.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Apache Tomcat, Uvicorn

Hari
Hari

Mar 3, 2020

Needs advice

I was in a situation where I have to configure 40 RHEL servers 20 each for Apache HTTP Server and Tomcat server. My task was to

  1. configure LVM with required logical volumes, format and mount for HTTP and Tomcat servers accordingly.
  2. Install apache and tomcat.
  3. Generate and apply selfsigned certs to http server.
  4. Modify default ports on Tomcat to different ports.
  5. Create users on RHEL for application support team.
  6. other administrative tasks like, start, stop and restart HTTP and Tomcat services.

I have utilized the power of ansible for all these tasks, which made it easy and manageable.

419k views419k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat
Uvicorn
Uvicorn

Apache Tomcat powers numerous large-scale, mission-critical web applications across a diverse range of industries and organizations.

It is a lightning-fast ASGI server, built on uvloop and httptools. Until recently Python has lacked a minimal low-level server/application interface for asyncio frameworks. The ASGI specification fills this gap, and means we're now able to start building a common set of tooling usable across all asyncio frameworks.

-
ASGI server implementation; Supports HTTP/1.1 and WebSockets; Support for HTTP/2 is planned
Statistics
GitHub Stars
8.0K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
5.3K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
16.9K
Stacks
168
Followers
12.6K
Followers
119
Votes
201
Votes
0
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 79
    Easy
  • 72
    Java
  • 49
    Popular
  • 1
    Spring web
Cons
  • 3
    Blocking - each http request block a thread
  • 2
    Easy to set up
No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available
Python
Python

What are some alternatives to Apache Tomcat, Uvicorn?

NGINX

NGINX

nginx [engine x] is an HTTP and reverse proxy server, as well as a mail proxy server, written by Igor Sysoev. According to Netcraft nginx served or proxied 30.46% of the top million busiest sites in Jan 2018.

Apache HTTP Server

Apache HTTP Server

The Apache HTTP Server is a powerful and flexible HTTP/1.1 compliant web server. Originally designed as a replacement for the NCSA HTTP Server, it has grown to be the most popular web server on the Internet.

Unicorn

Unicorn

Unicorn is an HTTP server for Rack applications designed to only serve fast clients on low-latency, high-bandwidth connections and take advantage of features in Unix/Unix-like kernels. Slow clients should only be served by placing a reverse proxy capable of fully buffering both the the request and response in between Unicorn and slow clients.

Microsoft IIS

Microsoft IIS

Internet Information Services (IIS) for Windows Server is a flexible, secure and manageable Web server for hosting anything on the Web. From media streaming to web applications, IIS's scalable and open architecture is ready to handle the most demanding tasks.

Passenger

Passenger

Phusion Passenger is a web server and application server, designed to be fast, robust and lightweight. It takes a lot of complexity out of deploying web apps, adds powerful enterprise-grade features that are useful in production, and makes administration much easier and less complex.

Gunicorn

Gunicorn

Gunicorn is a pre-fork worker model ported from Ruby's Unicorn project. The Gunicorn server is broadly compatible with various web frameworks, simply implemented, light on server resources, and fairly speedy.

Jetty

Jetty

Jetty is used in a wide variety of projects and products, both in development and production. Jetty can be easily embedded in devices, tools, frameworks, application servers, and clusters. See the Jetty Powered page for more uses of Jetty.

lighttpd

lighttpd

lighttpd has a very low memory footprint compared to other webservers and takes care of cpu-load. Its advanced feature-set (FastCGI, CGI, Auth, Output-Compression, URL-Rewriting and many more) make lighttpd the perfect webserver-software for every server that suffers load problems.

Swoole

Swoole

It is an open source high-performance network framework using an event-driven, asynchronous, non-blocking I/O model which makes it scalable and efficient.

Puma

Puma

Unlike other Ruby Webservers, Puma was built for speed and parallelism. Puma is a small library that provides a very fast and concurrent HTTP 1.1 server for Ruby web applications.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase